Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Just now, rickshaw said:

Lazar will work hard every game. An honest player. 

FWIW, we toss a lot of bottom players on the trash heap, but they go on to have decent careers elsewhere.

  • Like (+1) 4
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, SDS said:

FWIW, we toss a lot of bottom players on the trash heap, but they go on to have decent careers elsewhere.

100%

We talk a lot about how this team is always lesser than the sum of its parts, but this team also causes the players on it to be lesser than the sum of THEIR parts 

Edited by Thorny
Posted

Big news coming from the Islanders front office after today's game

.  Lou Lamoriello petitioned the NHL to play all of their remaining games against the Buffalo Sabres.  It is rumored that GMKA responded by saying that this was "unacceptable".

Posted
1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

... ummm

 

I wonder what Ralph has measured his whole career on ? Coaching a winning hockey team ? You’ve got your work cut out for you Ralph. I’m looking for an encouraging sign and mmm not really seeing any.

Posted
28 minutes ago, SDS said:

FWIW, we toss a lot of bottom players on the trash heap, but they go on to have decent careers elsewhere.

This is true 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
Just now, Thorny said:

I’m not sure I share Mike’s reading of it tbh. 

But its only my view 

Mike and Bill for what it’s worth. I did not listen to it. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (edited)

I think it was a wise move to put Casey Mittlestadt in to lose faceoffs and to put in whomever it is who wears 88, some Davidson or something, to secure the loss.

 

Edited by Eleven
Posted
18 minutes ago, Thorny said:

100%

We talk a lot about how this team is always lesser than the sum of its parts, but this team also causes the players on it to be lesser than the sum of THEIR parts 

Chemistry is so underrated.  We remember the 1996-9 and 2005-6 teams so fondly not just because they were good; we remember how committed they were to the system, the coach, the team concept, and to each other.

We also remember that, aide from Hasek, none of the players were considered 1A players at his position when the season started and that both sets of rosters had question marks galore.  Aside from Miroslav Satan, who on any of those teams would have been considered even 1B player heading into those seasons?  No one picked either the 1996-7 or 2005-6 teams to even make the playoffs.

That's why we dislike teams which are positionally unaware.  We fume when players coast to the bench on a change.  We hate that no one drives to the net.  We yell when no one defends a teammate getting roughed up.  We scream because they lose virtually every puck battle.

I once agreed with the old assessment that the 1974-86 teams were generally soft.  I have been watching games of them recently.  Nope.  They always has flaws, especially relative to the talent-minimising officiating of the era, but they were never deficient in the fundamentals of hockey or the basics of ensemble play.

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Awesome! (+1) 2
  • Thanks (+1) 1
Posted

After this run I can't believe there were enough of you watching this game to account for 19 pages of comments.

Who knew there were that many masochists on this forum?  Or is the Sabres the only abusive relationship you actively pursue?

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 2
Posted
9 minutes ago, Weave said:

After this run I can't believe there were enough of you watching this game to account for 19 pages of comments.

Who knew there were that many masochists on this forum?  Or is the Sabres the only abusive relationship you actively pursue?

I DVR the games, fast forward through stoppages, commercials, and between periods. Once the Sabres get behind I fast forward a minute at a time until there’s another score. My personal NHL Red Zone. With the constant falling behind I get through it in a hour.

Posted
12 minutes ago, Weave said:

After this run I can't believe there were enough of you watching this game to account for 19 pages of comments.

Who knew there were that many masochists on this forum?  Or is the Sabres the only abusive relationship you actively pursue?

It's difficult to turn your back on someone/thing you love.

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
  • Thanks (+1) 1
Posted (edited)

Went for a nice afternoon ride, had some lunch, went for a walk, just checking in.  The Sabres lost?  I can't believe it.  Anyone who watched live deserves a medal.

 

Can one of you math guys help me out with the odds of losing 3 straight games by the same score?

Edited by LabattBlue
Posted
1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

... ummm

 

Yeah.....But he could have said "Yes, that was good to see, I'm happy for him, and we need to keep it going!'

Instead he gave that  "smarmy" comment. Ralph is a pompous old fart and a lousy hockey coach.

  • Haha (+1) 4
  • Thanks (+1) 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Nitro60 said:

Young is not 20 something or inexperienced.  You read too much into it.  I am looking for a guy who has bench time and is in his late 30s early 40s.  That is young in my view.  

I turned 78 today. I need to reprogram my mind on young vs old 😂

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

Chemistry is so underrated.  We remember the 1996-9 and 2005-6 teams so fondly not just because they were good; we remember how committed they were to the system, the coach, the team concept, and to each other.

We also remember that, aide from Hasek, none of the players were considered 1A players at his position when the season started and that both sets of rosters had question marks galore.  Aside from Miroslav Satan, who on any of those teams would have been considered even 1B player heading into those seasons?  No one picked either the 1996-7 or 2005-6 teams to even make the playoffs.

That's why we dislike teams which are positionally unaware.  We fume when players coast to the bench on a change.  We hate that no one drives to the net.  We yell when no one defends a teammate getting roughed up.  We scream because they lose virtually every puck battle.

I once agreed with the old assessment that the 1974-86 teams were generally soft.  I have been watching games of them recently.  Nope.  They always has flaws, especially relative to the talent-minimising officiating of the era, but they were never deficient in the fundamentals of hockey or the basics of ensemble play.

It is all about leadership, and less about hockey skills.  The source of our failed chemistry, passion, battle and subsequent failure in our ability to consistently win and make the playoffs is, as much as it grieves me to say, our team's "Leader", our Captain, our chosen one, our Jack Eichel.  Leadership is proven in adversity, not when times are good.  Jack has been the consistent factor across 3 GM's and Coaches.  He is an elite talent. That is not in question.  Elite talent does not equate to leadership skill sets.  Jack's attitude, failure to be a leader of men in battle, not holding teammates accountable when lack of passion/fight/grit in the face of adversity is the cancer that has metastasized. 
 

Jack has failed us as a leader, but I don't think the blame solely rests on him.  We set him up for failure when the C was given to him before he proved leadership skills and earned that C.  Too many coaches/organizations in the NHL choose their C based solely on talent.  Give me an adequate talent with elite leadership skills/abilities as a Captain any day, over an elite talent at hockey skills but poor/vapid leadership skills. 

Sadly, Jack has been ruined for a future on the Sabres.  I would love for him to remain a Sabre for life, if he was no longer Captain and be removed from having the profound mantle of leadership so he could just focus on being an elite hockey player and a good teammate.  We cannot take the C from him now at this point - it would be embarrassing to him and make his attitude and our poisonous culture worse.  It would take a rare human being with the maturity level off the charts to be self-aware enough to do that successfully.

As has been stated in other threads, the best path forward to right this rotten sinking ship of a team:
1) Fire HCRK immediately.   He has proven his inability to coach.  Signal immediately sent to the remaining players.
2) Trade several "assets" by the deadline - either where valuable returns can be made, or depending on the player - addition by subraction (getting rid of players that have given up or don't have the fight in them).
3)  In offseason, make the biggest move of them all - Trade your #1 asset and elite hockey talent, Captain Jack.  We need to trade him before his NTC clause kicks in the following year.  Trading him in the offseason will remove emotion from the decision-making and will give us the most options for finding the best trade partner - when Cap questions & team finances will be clearer for all NHL franchises operating in the post-pandemic era.  If we are to maximize our Return on Asset/Return on Investment, this offseason is the time.   
4) GMKA's goal should be to eliminate & replace the players without passion & compete as he said in his recent Zoom press conference:
"Competitiveness and passion are a really important part of being a successful team," Adams said. "At the end of the day, it’s about out-competing the guy across from you, and if you have that in the DNA of your team then a lot of good things can happen. But you’re right, it all hasn’t been good enough. The passion hasn’t been good enough, the compete hasn’t been good enough, and you have to fix it.”
5) The next player selected to be Captain, must be chosen because he has PROVEN leadership skills.  For speed sake, this unfortunately rare quality of genuine leadership, will most-likely have to be brought in from another team.  The longer-term ideal would to be mentor and develop leadership skills with  a player internally for that role of Captain.  The good news is I believe we already have a strong candidate on our team in the kid from the Yukon Territory with maturity beyond his years.  We can't ruin Dylan Cozens by crushing him with that leadership mantle at such a young age and before he has EARNED it.  So I propose we bring in a "Bridge Captain" who has proven his leadership but is on the tail end of his career hockey-skills wise. This guy would be given the primary responsibility of mentoring leadership in Dylan for a couple years out and the bridge captain retires.

Sorry for the novella of a post, but we are at DEFCON 5 and we urgently need a wise, well-planned solution to our beloved Buffalo Sabres Hockey Club.  I say it happens primarily through removing the cancer of a Captain with failed leadership you have built your team & culture around, bring in a seasoned & successful Head Coach, ID a bridge C from the outside that will mentor Dylan Cozens or a player yet to be identified as our future leader.

What say you fellow Sabres fans for life?

- Let's GO Buff-a-lo!  

Edited by Jävə Keith
  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Jävə Keith said:

It is all about leadership, and less about hockey skills.  The source of our failed chemistry, passion, battle and subsequent failure in our ability to consistently win and make the playoffs is, as much as it grieves me to say, our team's "Leader", our Captain, our chosen one, our Jack Eichel.  Leadership is proven in adversity, not when times are good.  Jack has been the consistent factor across 3 GM's and Coaches.  He is an elite talent. That is not in question.  Elite talent does not equate to leadership skill sets.  Jack's attitude, failure to be a leader of men in battle, not holding teammates accountable when lack of passion/fight/grit in the face of adversity is the cancer that has metastasized. 
 

Jack has failed us as a leader, but I don't think the blame solely rests on him.  We set him up for failure when the C was given to him before he proved leadership skills and earned that C.  Too many coaches/organizations in the NHL choose their C based solely on talent.  Give me an adequate talent with elite leadership skills/abilities as a Captain any day, over an elite talent at hockey skills but poor/vapid leadership skills. 

Sadly, Jack has been ruined for a future on the Sabres.  I would love for him to remain a Sabre for life, if he was no longer Captain and be removed from having the profound mantle of leadership so he could just focus on being an elite hockey player and a good teammate.  We cannot take the C from him now at this point - it would be embarrassing to him and make his attitude and our poisonous culture worse.  It would take a rare human being with the maturity level off the charts to be self-aware enough to do that successfully.

As has been stated in other threads, the best path forward to right this rotten sinking ship of a team:
1) Fire HCRK immediately.   He has proven his inability to coach.  Signal immediately sent to the remaining players.
2) Trade several "assets" by the deadline - either where valuable returns can be made, or depending on the player - addition by subraction (getting rid of players that have given up or don't have the fight in them).
3)  In offseason, make the biggest move of them all - Trade your #1 asset and elite hockey talent, Captain Jack.  We need to trade him before his NTC clause kicks in the following year.  Trading him in the offseason will remove emotion from the decision-making and will give us the most options for finding the best trade partner - when Cap questions & team finances will be clearer for all NHL franchises operating in the post-pandemic era.  If we are to maximize our Return on Asset/Return on Investment, this offseason is the time.   
4) GMKA's goal should be to eliminate & replace the players without passion & compete as he said in his recent Zoom press conference:
"Competitiveness and passion are a really important part of being a successful team," Adams said. "At the end of the day, it’s about out-competing the guy across from you, and if you have that in the DNA of your team then a lot of good things can happen. But you’re right, it all hasn’t been good enough. The passion hasn’t been good enough, the compete hasn’t been good enough, and you have to fix it.”
5) The next player selected to be Captain, must be chosen because he has PROVEN leadership skills.  For speed sake, this unfortunately rare quality of genuine leadership, will most-likely have to be brought in from another team.  The longer-term ideal would to be mentor and develop leadership skills with  a player internally for that role of Captain.  The good news is I believe we already have a strong candidate on our team in the kid from the Yukon Territory with maturity beyond his years.  We can't ruin Dylan Cozens by crushing him with that leadership mantle at such a young age and before he has EARNED it.  So I propose we bring in a "Bridge Captain" who has proven his leadership but is on the tail end of his career hockey-skills wise. This guy would be given the primary responsibility of mentoring leadership in Dylan for a couple years out and the bridge captain retires.

Sorry for the novella of a post, but we are at DEFCON 5 and we urgently need a wise, well-planned solution to our beloved Buffalo Sabres Hockey Club.  I say it happens primarily through removing the cancer of a Captain with failed leadership you have built your team & culture around, bring in a seasoned & successful Head Coach, ID a bridge C from the outside that will mentor Dylan Cozens or a player yet to be identified as our future leader.

What say you fellow Sabres fans for life?

- A Let's Go Buff-a-lo!  

DEFCON 5 is the lowest of all DEFCONs.

  • Thanks (+1) 2
This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...